Spencer, J.

1. This is a petition under Section 115, C.P.C. to revise the order of two Judges of the Presidency Small Cause Court rejecting as being out of time an application for retrial of a Small Cause Suit tried by a single Judge of that Court.

2. A preliminary objection is raised that the High Court has no power of revision over an erroneous decision of a Small Cause Court on a question of limitation, It was held by a single Judge of this Court in Kuppuswami Iyengar v. Narayana Iyengar (1913) 16 M.L.T. 438 that an alleged erroneous decision of a Small Cause Court on a question of limitation was not liable to be revised under Section 115, C.P.C. and in Letters Patent Appeal Kuppu-swamy Iyengar v. Narayana Iyengar (1916) 19 M.L.T. 24 this view was upheld. In the present case, however, the result of the two Judges decision on the question of limitation has been that if they were wrong in so deciding, there was a failure on their part to exercise a jurisdiction vested in them and this will be within the scope of Section 115. In Sundaram v. Mausa Mavuthar (1922) I.L.R. 44 Mad. 554 F.B., it appears from the judgments of the learned Chief Justice and Kumaraswami Sastri, J. that